Comment Report

Description

Errata802.5w/d1: Full Comment ReportComment NAJ 01Section .3 Line 142 Severity A/C Type ED Status MODIFIEDHighlight To Committee Commenter Agrees? Editing CompleteNot enough detail. See section 4/line 281 for the Amd. 1 equivalent.Concern:New text:Solution:None. Corrects the detection of a condition requiring the priority STACK to be optionally cleared in the ISO/IEC 8802 5:1198/Amd. 1:1998 standard (all known implementations handle this condition correctly).Accept in principle. However section 3 deals with changes to 802.5:1998 so I Response:have removed the reference to Amd.1 (and added a few centuries).New text:None. Corrects the detection of a condition requiring the priority STACK to be optionally cleared in the ISO/IEC 8802 5:1998 standard (all known implementations handle this condition correctly).Rebuttal:Comment KR 01Section 0.0 Line 76 Severity A/C Type ED Status ACCEPTEDHighlight To Committee Commenter Agrees? Editing CompleteIf the blank page between the table of contents and the Overview is in fact a Concern:blank page and not a formatting snafu then it needs to be identified as such.If a blank page, add "This page intentionally left blank."Solution:formatting problem, please correct it.This will be addressed when the document is migrated to Framemaker prior to Response:publication.Rebuttal:Comment MJH-01Section 4.0 Line 382 Severity A/C Type ED Status MODIFIEDHighlight To Committee Commenter Agrees? Editing ...

Informations

• Publié par: Assa
• Nombre de lectures: 17
• Langue: English

Extrait

802.5w/d1: Full Comment Report

Errata

Comment

NAJ-01

Section

.3

Line

142

Severity

A/C

Type

ED

Concern:

Not enough detail.

See section 4/line 281 for the Amd. 1 equivalent.

Solution:

New text:

None.

Corrects the detection of a condition requiring the priority STACK to

be optionally cleared in the ISO/IEC 8802-5:1198/Amd. 1:1998 standard (all

known implementations handle this condition correctly).

Response:

Accept in principle.

However section 3 deals with changes to 802.5:1998 so I

have removed the reference to Amd.1 (and added a few centuries).

New text:

None.

Corrects the detection of a condition requiring the priority STACK to

be optionally cleared in the ISO/IEC 8802-5:1998 standard (all known

implementations handle this condition correctly).

Status

MODIFIED

Commenter Agrees?

Editing Complete

Highlight To Committee

Rebuttal:

Comment

KR-01

Section

0.0

Line

76

Severity

A/C

Type

ED

Concern:

If the blank page between the table of contents and the Overview is in fact a

blank page and not a formatting snafu then it needs to be identified as such.

Solution:

If a blank page, add "This page intentionally left blank."

If a formatting problem, please correct it.

Response:

This will be addressed when the document is migrated to Framemaker prior to

publication.

Status

ACCEPTED

Commenter Agrees?

Editing Complete

Highlight To Committee

Rebuttal:

Comment

MJH-01

Section

4.0

Line

382

Severity

A/C

Type

ED

Concern:

The change to REF 3206, adds the text 'FSMR<2' to the Event column, without

the change indication.

Solution:

Remove 'FSMR<2'

Response:

Good catch.

Remove "FSMR<2 & ".

Status

MODIFIED

Commenter Agrees?

Editing Complete

Highlight To Committee

Rebuttal:

Page 1 of 5

21-Jan-99

802.5/99/01-05r1

Comment

MJH-02

Section

4.0

Line

398

Severity

A/C

Type

ED

Concern:

References 1203 and 1210 have had the 'S/T' field captalized (can't have a

York meeting without a long discussion on captialization).

Solution:

Leave them as they were,

ie 'TEDa' and 'TEDb' or change them all. (1208 ,

1204, 1205, and new TEDH on 1209) and all the TDEx). If changed ensure changed

is underlined.

Response:

Background: Other clauses seem to use all caps for alternatives.

Figure M.3

in W/d1 has been changed to use all caps where before it said TEDa.

802.5w seems to have been based on changes from 802.5t in practice.

This has

caused difficulties such as the one outlined in this comment.

The committee

feels that the document should be based on changes from 802.5 and Amd.1

instead.

The irrelevant editorial changes will be removed.

Status

MODIFIED

Commenter Agrees?

Editing Complete

Highlight To Committee

Rebuttal:

Comment

MJH-03

Section

4.0

Line

398

Severity

A/C

Type

ED

Concern:

'S/T' 'TEDH' added to ref 1209, without underline

Solution:

Indicate 'S/T' has been changed.

Response:

Avoid the change.

See MJH-02.

Status

MODIFIED

Commenter Agrees?

Editing Complete

Highlight To Committee

Rebuttal:

Comment

EDTR-17

Section

4.0

Line

398

Severity

DIS

Type

ED

Concern:

Transition 1209 is missing a S/T column entry.

Ref 1205 has the wrong S/T

entry.

Solution:

Suggest: Add next free "TED?" reference as the S/T column entry for ref 1209.

Change 1205's S/T entry back to "TEDe".

Editor to sort out the details.

Try to avoid clashes with 802.5t.

Response:

Status

ACCEPTED

Commenter Agrees?

Editing Complete

Highlight To Committee

Rebuttal:

Comment

MJH-04

Section

4.0

Line

398

Severity

A/C

Type

ED

Concern:

'S/T' for 1205 has been changed from 'TEDe' to 'TEDH'

Solution:

Indicate 'S/T' has been changed.

Response:

See MJH-02.

Status

MODIFIED

Commenter Agrees?

Editing Complete

Highlight To Committee

Rebuttal:

Page 2 of 5

21-Jan-99

802.5/99/01-05r1

Comment

MJH-06

Section

4.0

Line

398

Severity

A/C

Type

ED

Concern:

Comment on ref 1209 has been changed without being underlined.

Solution:

Indicate comment changed

Response:

See MJH-02.

Status

MODIFIED

Commenter Agrees?

Editing Complete

Highlight To Committee

Rebuttal:

Comment

MJH-05

Section

4.0

Line

398

Severity

A/C

Type

ED

Concern:

Comment on action for ref 1210 has been changed, without being underlined.

Solution:

Indicate comment changed

Response:

See MJH-02.

Status

MODIFIED

Commenter Agrees?

Editing Complete

Highlight To Committee

Rebuttal:

Comment

MJH-07

Section

4.0

Line

400

Severity

A/C

Type

ED

Concern:

The event for ref 1606 has had a non-indicated change of

CSLE<255.

Solution:

Change CSLE to CPLE and do not indicate a change.

Response:

Correct.

Status

ACCEPTED

Commenter Agrees?

Editing Complete

Highlight To Committee

Rebuttal:

Comment

MJH-08

Section

4.0

Line

424

Severity

A/C

Type

ED

Concern:

'S/T''s TDEb, TDEa, TEDa, TEDb, TEDc, TEDd have been capitalized without a

change indication. TEDe has been deleted without a change indication. TEDH has

been added without a change indication.

Solution:

Make diagram consistent with actual table and indicate ALL changes.

Response:

Accept, in that the irrelevant changes will be undone.

Status

ACCEPTED

Commenter Agrees?

Editing Complete

Highlight To Committee

Rebuttal:

Comment

NAJ-02

Section

A..7

Line

165

Severity

DIS

Type

ED

Concern:

Table A.7.3.4

<<TBD>> reference should be fixed.

Solution:

Should be 8.3

Response:

Done.

Status

ACCEPTED

Commenter Agrees?

Editing Complete

Highlight To Committee

Rebuttal:

Page 3 of 5

21-Jan-99

802.5/99/01-05r1

Comment

NAJ-03

Section

A..7

Line

167

Severity

DIS

Type

ED

Concern:

Table A.7.3.5

<<TBD>> reference should be fixed.

Solution:

Should be 8.3.1

Response:

Done.

Status

ACCEPTED

Commenter Agrees?

Editing Complete

Highlight To Committee

Rebuttal:

Comment

NAJ-04

Section

A..7

Line

169

Severity

DIS

Type

ED

Concern:

Table A.7.3.6

<<TBD>> reference should be fixed.

Solution:

Should be 13.7.2.2

Response:

Done.

Status

ACCEPTED

Commenter Agrees?

Editing Complete

Highlight To Committee

Rebuttal:

Comment

MJH-09

Section

A.5

Line

106

Severity

Q

Type

TECH

Concern:

Was the 'Status' for *DTRS and *DTRP in the ISO 8802-5 Amd 1 document,

incorrect?

Solution:

Response:

Yes.

The entries you refer to allowed you state that an implementation was

both a station and a C-Port.

This is not possible within the standard.

However if you are a C-Port, you can be in station emulation mode.

But that's

not the same as being a station.

Status

ANSWERED

Commenter Agrees?

Editing Complete

Highlight To Committee

Rebuttal:

Comment

MJH-11

Section

A.6

Line

112

Severity

A/C

Type

ED

Concern:

This 'Item' has been renamed 'TRM'. I believe Txxx convention was used for

Timers and TRxx for Transmitter Specs, since this is neither of thos types

what is TRM meant to convey?

Solution:

Rename it back to DSM.

Response:

There is no such stated convention regarding the naming of PICS entries.

As

long as there's no conflict with any other name the labels are arbitrary.

Further, the new name relates to the title of the PICS entry "Transitions

Relating to MAC Frames" whereas the committee was unable to see the connection

between "DSM" and the PICS entry.

Status

REJECTED

Commenter Agrees?

Editing Complete

Highlight To Committee

Rebuttal:

Page 4 of 5

21-Jan-99

802.5/99/01-05r1

Comment

MJH-10

Section

A.6

Line

112

Severity

Q

Type

TECH

Concern:

Reference 3.3 has been deleted from this table. Is this correct?

Solution:

Response:

This was done because the transitions are in 4 and 9, and the formats in 3 and

10.

There are entries refering to 3 and 10 elsewhere.

Status

ANSWERED

Commenter Agrees?

Editing Complete

Highlight To Committee

Rebuttal:

Comment

SJH-01

Section

P.0

Line

0

Severity

A/C

Type

ED

Concern:

Annex P in ISO/IEC 8802-5 : 1998 has an incorrect header at the top of the odd

pages … see page 243. The date is incorrect.

Solution:

Correct to 1998.

Response:

Good spot.

However this document is not dealing with purely editorial issues.

Status

REJECTED

Commenter Agrees?

Editing Complete

Highlight To Committee

Rebuttal:

Page 5 of 5

21-Jan-99

802.5/99/01-05r1

802.5w/d1: Comment Index

Errata

EDTR-17

2

KR-01

1

MJH-01

1

MJH-02

2

MJH-03

2

MJH-04

2

MJH-05

3

MJH-06

3

MJH-07

3

MJH-08

3

MJH-09

4

MJH-10

5

MJH-11

4

NAJ-01

1

NAJ-02

3

NAJ-03

4

NAJ-04

4

SJH-01

5

Index Page 1

21-Jan-99

802.5/99/01-05r1

Errata

802.5w/d1: Comment Summary

MJH-09 MJH-10

Total

To Be

Closed

Total Comments:

18

12

0

4

0

0

2

ED

TECH

A/C

DIS

Q

Total A/C Comments:

12

Total DIS Comments:

4

Total Q Comments:

2

NAJ-01 KR-01 MJH-07 MJH-08 SJH-01

0

OPEN

7

ACCEPTED

7

MODIFIED

2

REJECTED

2

ANSWERED

0

WITHDRAWN

0

0

6

1

2

0

MJH-01 MJH-02 MJH-03 MJH-04 MJH-06 MJH-05 MJH-11

EDTR-17 NAJ-02 NAJ-03 NAJ-04

DIS Comment IDs:

Q Comment IDs:

A/C Comment IDs:

Comment IDs by Type. Bold IDs require closure.

Summary Page 1

21-Jan-99

802.5/99/01-05r1